part i: general project informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-sv... · regional...

11
PART I: General Project Information 1. Project Title: Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation, City/County limit to Bluebonnet Lane 2. Total Funding Requested: $ 200.000 Total Project Cost: $ 222,000 3. Implementing Agency: City of Scotts Valley 4. Sponsoring Public Agency that has Master Agreement with Caltrans:same 5. This is priority number __2 __ of __2 __ projects submitted. 6. Project summary: Stabilization, rehabilitation and overlay of failing portions of Bean Creek Road as well as overlay or slurry seal of remaining portions from Bluebonnet Lane, .6 miles to the City/County boundary line. 7. Project Description/Scope: Bean Creek Road is a local/rural from Scotts Valley Drive extending from Scotts Valley Drive .6 miles to the City /County boundary and continuing 2.7 miles to the intersection of Glenwood Drive in the County of Santa Cruz. The portion from Scotts Valley Drive to Bluebonnet Lane is fronted by Scotts Valley Middle School and medium high density residential. This portion was widened to add bicycle lanes and sidewalk, and overlaid using various grant funds in 2009. Bluebonnet Lane to the City/County limit is .6 miles of 22', 2 lane road fronting medium high density residential and the 220 unit Montevalle Senior Mobile Home Park. The roadway becomes rural serving several low density residential parcels to the City limit. Beyond the City limit the roadway continues rural in nature serving low density County residential parcels to its intersection with Glenwood Drive. Bean Creek Road is heavily used by recreational cyclists as well as a more limited number of pedestrians again as recreation because of its rural, forested nature. Recent complaints by both communities about the poor condition of the roadway surface have raised the priority by the City for rehabilitation. City Council discussed the concerns at the City Council Meeting on October 16, 2013 with input from residents submitted by staff. They directed staff to proceed to seek funds for rehabilitation of the roadway 8. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified as “Constrained” 9. Project Cost by Mode: 95% Road Rehab; 5% new bike facility 10. Project Location and Limits or Service Area: Attached a. Project Length: .6 miles b. Complete Street Design Type: Local Subdivision Street/Local

Upload: others

Post on 25-Aug-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified

PART I: General Project Information 1. Project Title: Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation, City/County limit to Bluebonnet Lane 2. Total Funding Requested: $ 200.000

Total Project Cost: $ 222,000

3. Implementing Agency: City of Scotts Valley 4. Sponsoring Public Agency that has Master Agreement with Caltrans:same 5. This is priority number __2__ of __2__ projects submitted. 6. Project summary: Stabilization, rehabilitation and overlay of failing portions of Bean Creek Road

as well as overlay or slurry seal of remaining portions from Bluebonnet Lane, .6 miles to the City/County boundary line.

7. Project Description/Scope: Bean Creek Road is a local/rural from Scotts Valley Drive extending from Scotts

Valley Drive .6 miles to the City /County boundary and continuing 2.7 miles to the intersection of Glenwood Drive in the County of Santa Cruz.

The portion from Scotts Valley Drive to Bluebonnet Lane is fronted by Scotts Valley Middle School and medium high density residential. This portion was widened to add bicycle lanes and sidewalk, and overlaid using various grant funds in 2009.

Bluebonnet Lane to the City/County limit is .6 miles of 22', 2 lane road fronting medium high density residential and the 220 unit Montevalle Senior Mobile Home Park. The roadway becomes rural serving several low density residential parcels to the City limit. Beyond the City limit the roadway continues rural in nature serving low density County residential parcels to its intersection with Glenwood Drive.

Bean Creek Road is heavily used by recreational cyclists as well as a more limited number of pedestrians again as recreation because of its rural, forested nature. Recent complaints by both communities about the poor condition of the roadway surface have raised the priority by the City for rehabilitation. City Council discussed the concerns at the City Council Meeting on October 16, 2013 with input from residents submitted by staff. They directed staff to proceed to seek funds for rehabilitation of the roadway

8. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27

a. Project costs are identified as “Constrained”

9. Project Cost by Mode: 95% Road Rehab; 5% new bike facility

10. Project Location and Limits or Service Area: Attached a. Project Length: .6 miles b. Complete Street Design Type: Local Subdivision Street/Local

Page 2: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified

2014 RTIP Funding Request

Page 2

Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation Project

c. Provide information on existing and projected conditions/context for projects on roadways

Existing With project (write “N/C” if no change)

Functional classification of this road, as defined by FHWA?*

10cal/Rural N/C

Right-of-way width 40 N/C Roadway pavement width 22 N/C # of automobile lanes NB/EB: 1 SB/WB: 1 NB/EB: 1 SB/WB: 12-Way Center Turn Lane (Yes/No) No N/C Sidewalks (none, one side or both?) None N/C Sidewalk width N/A N/C Landscaping (Yes/No) No N/C On-Street Parking (Yes/No) No N/C Shoulder width 0-4 Feet N/C Bike lane width Class III N/C Intersections (Signalized/unsignalized) 1 Unsignalized N/C Pavement condition (poor, fair, good) Poor New Posted speed limit 25 25 Traffic Volumes 1,500 2,000 ADT at 2017 Transit Route/Stops (Yes/No) No N/C Truck Route (Yes/No) No N/C Are accommodations for seniors, disabled, and youth/students sufficient? (Yes/No)

No N/C

11. Project Schedule:

Project Milestone Month/YearBegin Environmental (PA&ED) Phase 01/01/14Circulate Draft Environmental Document

Document Type (ex. EIR)

Categorical Exemption

03/01/14

End Environmental Phase (PA&ED Milestone) 06/01/14Begin Design (PS&E) Phase 7End Design Phase (complete PS&E) 9Begin Right of Way Phase N/AEnd Right of Way Phase (Right of Way Certification Milestone) N/ARequest Authorization to Proceed with Construction (completion of all prior tasks) 10/01/14Award Contract 03/01/15End Construction Phase (Construction Contract Acceptance Milestone) 06/01/15End Closeout Phase (Closeout Report) 07/01/15

12. Contact Person/Project Manager Name: Majid Yamin Telephone Number: 831-438-5854 E-mail: [email protected]

Page 3: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified

2014 RTIP Funding Request

Page 3

Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation Project

PART II Project Benefits

1. Generally, what are the benefits of this project? Rehabilitate a roadway that due to it’s current

condition discourages use by cyclists as well as pedestrians. 2. How many travelers will be directly served by this project per day? 2,000

a. ADT volumes: 1,500 b. Other (e.g. avg. number of people directly served/day; number of users of facility/day; TDM-

direct participants) De minimus c. For projects with bike, ped, transit, or TDM elements – Number of people expected to shift from

automobile to alternative mode De minimus (average per day) d. Source(s) used to develop estimates shown above: City traffic counts

3. Who are the primary travelers served/targeted by project?

Commuters Recreational users Visitors Youth K-12 Students College Students Low income Seniors Disabled Other__________________________

a. Briefly describe indirect beneficiaries of the project, if any:

4. What are the key destinations served by this project and distance (in approximate feet) from project/facility?

Employment centers 4752 feet Senior centers 1600 feet Senior housing 0 feet K-12 Schools 2112 feet Groceries/Services 2640 feet Retail/Commercial center ______feet Transit centers 1584 feet Visitor destination ______feet Parks/recreational area 2112 feet Civic/public facilities 1590 feet Other Library

a. Are there other planned transportation and/or land use projects that could affect

circulation in the project area in the future? Yes, the City Town Center project is in the development design phase. The Town Center boarders the proposed rehabilitation project and the additional users will also benefit.

b. Are planned (future) land use projects anticipated to increase travel demand through

project area? (Mark yes or no for each mode) Car: Yes No Transit: Yes No Truck/Goods: Yes No

Bike: Yes No Pedestrian: Yes No

5. What travel condition(s) are improved or impacted as a result of the proposed project design? Safety: Improves transportation safety

There are currently perceived safety/speeding issues in the project area Project will reduce fatal and/or injury collisions

Page 4: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified

2014 RTIP Funding Request

Page 4

Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation Project

There is a history of collisions in the project area o Number of severe injury or fatal incidents in project area in past 10 years___

(Source? e.g. http://tims.berkeley.edu ___________________) Improves safety for which modes: ___________________________________ Reduces potential for conflict between cyclists and/or pedestrians and vehicles

Safety improved for youth, vulnerable users (pedestrians/bicyclist), and transportation disadvantaged (low income, seniors, disabled, minority status)

Provides access to emergency services System Preservation: Preserves existing transportation infrastructure/facilities or services

o Pavement: Current PCI of road <30. Projected PCI with project 80 o Why is this location/facility a priority for preservation, especially over other facilities?

(e.g. is project part of a pavement management plan) Cycling community expressed concerns about pavement condition.

Reduces Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Improves multimodal Level of Service

Increases walking There are currently lacking/insufficient pedestrian facilities

Improves connectivity, fills gap in sidewalk/pedestrian path network Reduces distance to walk trip between neighborhood and key destination

Adds new sidewalks or paths on: one or both sides of the street Widens sidewalk path of travel for current and projected pedestrian volumes Adds missing curb ramps Upgrades facility to meet ADA accessibility requirements, implement ADA

Implementation Plan Reduces pedestrian crossing distance Adds pedestrian signal heads Adds pedestrian-actuated traffic signals or automatic pedestrian cycles Adds audible countdown at intersection Adds pedestrian-level lighting Adds high visibility crosswalks Adds illumination at crosswalks Other crosswalk enhancements Adds median safety islands Minimizes driveways Adds wayfinding signage Adds shade trees (Street trees) Adds planter or buffer strips Adds benches or other types of seating

Increases bicycling There are currently lacking/insufficient bicycle facilities Improves connectivity, fills gap in bicycle network Reduces distance to bike trip between neighborhood and key destination

New Class I bicycle path New Class II bicycle path

Page 5: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified

2014 RTIP Funding Request

Page 5

Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation Project

Shared-Lane Marking (Sharrow) New Bicycle boulevard Widens bicycle lanes from ____ feet to _____feet wide Widens outside lanes or improve shoulders Adds bicycle actuation at signals (i.e., loop detectors and stencil or other means to make

signals responsive to bicycles) Adds bicycle box at intersection Adds color-treated bicycle lane Adds floating bicycle lane Adds signs, signals and pavement markings specifically related to bicycle operation on

roadways or shared-use facilities Adds route/wayfinding signage Adds long-term bicycle parking (e.g., for commuters and residents) Adds short-term bicycle parking

Increases public transit usage Reduces air pollution Improves travel time reliability of the transportation system. Which modes? _______________ Improves efficiency of the transportation system. Which modes? _______________ Reduces total traffic congestion Reduces disparities in safety and access for people who are transportation disadvantaged due to

age, income, disability or limited English proficiency Improves the convenience and quality of trips

Increases ecological function (such as: increases tree canopy; improves habitat; improves water quality; reduces storm water runoff; enhances sensitive areas )

6. Will project result in the elimination or reduction of an existing bike path or sidewalk? Will the proposed project sever or remove all or part of an existing pedestrian or bicycle facility or block or hinder pedestrian or bicycle movement? Yes No. a. Was the facility being removed, modified, or replaced previously funded through the RTC?

Yes No

7. Complete Streets Implementation/Design. Given the street design and existing and future conditions, please complete the following (for projects on roadways). (See the Monterey Bay Area Complete Street Guidebook for more information, definitions.) a. Describe how this project is consistent with the guidebook: As a roadway rehabilitation project within

the existing public right of way, the project is exempt from CEQA. As such the project is also exempt from the complete streets act. Considerations of the complete streets act were incorporated however, by including the perspectives of all stakeholders including cyclists, pedestrians and seniors in the senior housing fronting the project. It is also consistent with local policies and has considered adjacent land uses and meeting the needs of all users of the roadway.

b. Is the project area a candidate for the following? Road Diet (3 or more lanes, but ADT <20,000, bicycle collisions) Yes No

Page 6: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified

2014 RTIP Funding Request

Page 6

Bean Creek Road Rehabilitation Project

Traffic Calming: Yes No Roundabout: Yes No Transit/Bike/Ped Prioritization at Intersection: Yes No Transit-Oriented Development/Transit Corridor (15 min. headways: Yes No Neighborhood Shared Street: Yes No Pedestrian Place: Yes No

c. Is the complete streets cross section/design for this type of street (as recommended in the Guidebook) supportable for this project? Yes No If not, explain why:

Lack of ROW width Insufficient Funding Trees/environmental constraints Existing Structures

d. Have alternative designs been considered? Yes No

e. What refinements of the cross section/design were needed?

Removed/partial zones (Guidebook Ch. 5) for: Pedestrians Bicyclists Landscaping Vehicles Parking

Considered alternative routes/locations for:

Pedestrians Bicyclists Landscaping Vehicles Parking

f. Exemptions to Complete Streets (refer to Ch. 6 of the Guidebook) Is the project exempt from accommodating certain users? Yes No Is the cost excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use? Yes No There is a documented absence of current and future need? Yes No Other Categorically exempt and within existing right of way.

8. Describe the public input plan for this project.

The senior mobile home housing has been included as well as the cyclist community. All stakeholders expressed the need for improving the condition of the roadway to make it more appropriate for cyclists and pedestrians.

9. Stakeholder Outreach: Which stakeholder groups have already provided input, or will be asked to provide input in future, on project scope and design?

Have specific changes been requested by stakeholders? Yes No

10. Describe project readiness/deliverability: The project is exempt from CEQA and within the

existing public right of way. Scotts Valley City Council considered the project on October 16, 2013 and directed funding be sought for the project. The matching funds were approved.

Group Provided input

Will seek input

Neighborhood Group Yes Business Association School Property Owners Bicycle Committees Yes Pedestrian Committee

Group Provided input

Will seek input

Transit Agency Adjacent jurisdictions Yes Environmental Groups Transportation Disadvantaged

Senior Group Yes

Page 7: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified
Page 8: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified
Page 9: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified
Page 10: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified
Page 11: PART I: General Project Informationsccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2013-11-SV... · Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Project Number: SV – P27 a. Project costs are identified